LCD v plasma

Find the television set that's right for you, with the help of Sydney Morning Herald technology editor Simon Tsang.

Macs versus PCs. The Rolling Stones versus The Beatles. Great debates never die. They just incite vitriolic forum posts online. Into the fray has come plasma versus LCD televisions.

While sales of plasma sets appear to be in decline, the technology is far from dead and debate rages over whether LCD or plasma televisions are better.

Although plasma has generally been accepted as producing the better overall picture quality, with deeper blacks and better fast action, LCDs have been improving rapidly.

For many, it's not so much a debate as confusion about what type of television set to buy. It's little wonder, as the game keeps changing, technology continues to progress, weaknesses are overcome and prices continue to tumble.

Plasma manufacturers argue the growth by LCD sets is mostly in the small-screen segment of the market. Plasma accounts for 25 per cent of televisions sold in Australia overall, but for sizes above 42 inches, its share jumps to about 65 per cent, according to the plasma product manager at Samsung, Scott Kuru.

In fact, plasma sales have had a bumper year, affirms the director of consumer electronics at Panasonic, Paul Reid.

"In Australia, Panasonic is selling more plasma TVs this year than ever before," Reid says. Like Samsung, Panasonic makes both plasma and LCD television sets.

In the past two years, Samsung claims to have reduced its plasmas' energy consumption by 40 per cent. They are also thinner than they used to be and carry connectivity features to match the best of the LCDs.

Talk plasmas, however, and the issue of burn-in always raises its head. This is where traces of a static image that has been displayed can still be seen long after the picture is off the screen.

"You'd have to really abuse your TV for burn-in to occur," Kuru says. "Obviously, a TV wasn't designed to be a picture frame or to have a work of art on it for 12 to 24 hours."

LCD sets, meanwhile, have been improving. The latest is LED backlighting. Light-emitting diodes have been around for a long time, but only in recent years have these tiny light sources become popular replacements for more traditional fluorescent technology in displays.

How they differ

So, where does that leave the great rivalry? In essence, things haven't changed much. If you want a big screen size (typically 46-inch and larger), opt for plasma. It is cheaper.

Smaller than that, and it gets a bit more competitive between the two technologies.

If you have a large budget, Samsung's LED backlighting offers a better view in brightly lit environments, but the sets are not cheap.

For about half the cost, you can get Panasonic's Viera G10 series plasma screen. Sony's Bravia Z Series is also a cheaper LCD option.

This is where the decision about which one to buy is driven more by factors other than price.

The fundamental difference between plasma and LCD technologies is that one uses backlighting and the other doesn't. Think of LCD technology as like a window blind that can block light or allow it to come through. Just as no blind blocks 100 per cent of the light, neither is the LCD layer able to perfectly prevent the backlighting from leaking through. Thus, LCDs struggle to produce true black levels or retain details in dark scenes.

Plasma, on the other hand, works by stimulating individual pixel elements to light up when needed, so without backlighting, all it needs to do to produce black is to leave the pixel switched off. As a result, plasma technology inherently has much better contrast than LCD.

However, the final decision needn't be as technical as it sounds. Both technologies have their merits, which will depend on your particular viewing environment.

Light impact

LCDs look much brighter than plasmas and the colours almost leap out of the screen. Because of their smaller pixel sizes, LCD screens also tend to look sharper.

For this reason, they often look better in brightly lit stores sitting next to a plasma. However, most homes aren't lit up like a shop display, so the way it looks in your lounge might be very different.

If your viewing habits mean you watch a lot of programmes during the day where there is plenty of natural light, LCDs are probably a better bet. This is also the case if your night-time viewing tends to be with all the lights switched on.

Where plasmas look better is in dimly lit rooms. The colours are more subdued and natural. Room lighting is the crucial factor, so where possible, try to view your prospective purchase in conditions similar to your living room.

The debate will likely continue until only one is left standing. That, however, may take some time.

PLASMA

Pros

More natural colour reproduction

Better black levels and contrast

Fast motion

Lower price for large screens

Cons

Uses more power

Larger and heavier

More glare

Less economical to produce in smaller sizes

LCD

Pros

Wider choice of screen sizes

Sharper image with smaller pixel sizes

Uses less energy

Thinner and lighter

Cons

More expensive in large sizes

Limited colour palette

Light leakage

Difficult to produce true blacks

Pixelation in fast-action scenes.

- © Fairfax NZ News